Topic: Poker Strategies/Hand Analysis Discussion. (No low quality generic posts) (Read 724 times)

Thats because in HU, you actually learn the players' pattern. It might seems random at first but once it gets to over 100 hands or so, people are repeating some type of pattern. Thats also why in most online HU, pro poker players would most likely use randomizer to determine their action

Its also why you can put down notes on players in online poker, the features are there to help people jot down those patterns

---

Out of curiousity, how do you set the table to display the chips in BB? I tried to do that on the HU tournament but I cant seems to find it though

Lol it's still a bit embarrassing but yeah I've watched that video at least 100 times at this point. His lisp makes it even funnier, I don't know why, it just makes him sound like he's younger and maybe a little slow or something (not that there's a damn thing wrong with having a lisp, so I don't want anyone getting upset with me).  But yeah glad I was able to find a link that worked for you.  I just watched it like 3 times before making this post, I wish it lasted longer lol.

Easy allin against somebody that raised 80% of hands preflop.  AQ is a premium hand against almost everything you raise I am well ahead.  In this instance I was slightly behind preflop, so no shame in that.

Yeah we can do an omaha game, I don't mind. Let's play 5 card or even 6 card omaha, it's the most fun. Guess you are not so familiar with the hilo variant of the game (that's my favorite) so the regular game is fine.
About the rest we can figure something out. Best of 3 is of course also more than ok!

 
You are right I am just bluffing all the time because I play for fun. Still, it is embarrassing that you are putting me and Royse in the same bracket in terms of poker ability . I consider myself a fish who is just getting lucky but Royse is not even a fish in poker.


I can assure you that mv1986 is easily the best player among us. He does not show any tilt which makes him even more lethal. I am saying this because very few players are capable of not tilting against me . Have a look at his heads-up matches from the heads-up championship especially the final. What a battle!

---

If I am not mistaken you are hinting towards a heads-up match against me or Royse when you said it is easy to have an edge against us (do not correct me even if I am wrong ). Are you up for it? I mean I am willing to play OMAHA only with the best of 3 against you. You decide the stakes and timings.
Sorry, mv1986 I have not jumped that eagerly on your heads-up proposal , sometimes I have to look at the odds as well .

@AHOYBRAUSE, just to entice you further...(I did not resize it as it is easier to see the table reaction )



 

   

Nobody was talking about the A4 hand though. 
Raising 3bb would mean I put in 75% of my stack preflop anyway. And even if mv just calls with A9 and checks the flop to trap I would go allin because often enough an ace is still good there. Also, for obvious reasons I didn't want a call, not even from something like 56 or whatever. Running into a better ace is very unlikely 3 handed but yet it was the situation. 
So, A4 was obviously a steal from my part. Having 12.5bb and 2bb in the middle with blinds and ante any ace is basically a shove hoping to collect the blinds without seeing a flop when you are short. 

HU is always a 2 edged sword. Often enough the person that gets the better end of setups wins. Against people the bluff all the time such as you  , Royse and dump for example it's easier to have an edge, hahaha. But against solid players like mv the smallest things and often enough the cards make the difference.

@AHOYBRAUSE
When you shoved A4, you had more than 10 bb, not 8 bb. Although for me A4 is still a shove, but to a 3 bb raise with one more potential caller behind and a significant bounty + prize jumps in place, I mean it is tough but I would have leaned towards the fold, personally. I mean, you have zero-fold equity.     

Your call with Q2 was OK. But. I find merit in this argument of mv1986,

But again, this might be I know, that you know that I know... thing since you already mentioned that you are very well aware of the fact that he is leveraging his stack,

@mv1986 your take on blockers is good and any good NLHE player would like to second this.


lol, I can see why you love OMAHA.

---

For me, it will be interesting to see you both play against each other in a heads-up match for both variants. I can set it up for you guys. I will also livestream. Let me know if you guys want that.    

As I said, I would love to see you next table.

You didn't just have me "covered", I had 6bb and you had 64bb.
LOL what are you even talking about? 10 high crushes nothing that calls most of the time, let's be real here.
Talking a hand like 10 6 strong is so funny. You had chips and you had to push, I know that, but don't try to say that 106 is such a strong hand, because it's not. When you are getting called you are almost always, AT BEST, having a coinflip, that's what it is.

106 crushes 50% of the time, now I have heard it all. 

Anyway, why are you even replying again and again? You already made a post after the one you just quoted. Just enjoy your win.

2 overcards yes. And any call when you had like 15 BB would be weak. 610 suited has crushed you almost 50% o the time. My value pushing in the position, your value is zero. You must call with everything K+kicker, you decided Q+kicker. I got you covered anyway.

No worries, it happens to everyone .  

Hilarious! HIT ME!!!
It is even more funny than the James Bond movie, Casino Royale's Poker scene . Wait!, are you saying that scene in the movie has nothing to do with comedy? Are you kidding me?

Lmao NLHE , duh! Embarrassing 🙈

You need yourself a VPN my friend. I thought it was banned here in the U.S. too and I sure as f don’t have an account there it was just the first link available for this trolling deal ..here ya go https://youtube.com/shorts/bLFjAqnH1Hk?si=bcy0ZxDuOmUJjU3S


I will reply more tomorrow, dead tired just wanted to quickly post my admitted embarrassment and a new link.   I think I have watched that video at least 100 times as this point.

NLHE = No Limit Hold 'Em 

You are a much more established member than me. I apologize if self-moderation seems rude to you. My intention was to create a high-quality discussion with experienced poker players. You are more than welcome to share your strategy anytime.

It's a decent experience playing live. Especially if you are playing with the same people again and again you can really study and win. Unfortunately, I never played live poker so the only poker faces I have are emojis.

Unfortunately, (or fortunately ) Tiktok is banned in India.

I agree with your overall approach for each variant. I also play GTOish in Ruch and Cash and Exploitative in normal tables.

So we can't talk about the most popular form of poker here?  (Texas Hold'em).  Feel free to delete my post but I have a feeling you'd agree that deserves discussion too.

I'll be honest when it comes to playing Hold'em, there's really three ways of playing that I know of.  Online, In person quick games, and then what I consider to be the ultimate form of legit poker, sit down tournaments.  I think practice above all is what made me a good player when Poker (Texas H) exploded in the US back in 2004-5ish.  There was a game at my apt complex at college at someone's place, every single night for like a year straight.  My strategies were to never change my facial expression.  I would stare at the table and try not to show any emotion at all.  I never ever showed my cards when I folded.  I would make a few ridiculous hand plays just to throw the other players off.  Man I miss those days so damn much.  I still have my poker chip set actually sitting right next to me that I bought on ebay back then.  The chips are way too clean (aka I need to use them more)

When it comes to playing online it's difficult to utilize these strategies but you kinda can.

This is one of the funniest virtual poker videos I've ever seen. Prob watched it a 100x lol https://www.tiktok.com/@goodgriefsyt/video/7183863913665154347?lang=en

May the best players win, this is what it should me.

But listen, I would be up for Omaha. AHOYBRAUSE, let's get Omaha going!

What about Texas hold 'em?

My poker strategy depends on the type of poker I play. For example, in my region, there are two types, one is turbo fast poker where you sit on tables and every next hand is played on a different table, so you have no time to learn the behaviour of your opponents and there is another type of Poker where you play on a regular table where the player can sit as long as they wish.

When I play the first mode of Poker, I try to play fair because I don't know the psychology of my opponent and I find it hard to risk in these situations, so I mostly depend on my luck but when I play the second mode of Poker, I try to analyze my opponents. At first, I bluff at random moments to know what kind of opponents I have. Once I learn their behaviour, I become very careful with bluffing and my play style.

To be fair, I was winning a lot when I first started playing poker, when I didn't know the rules and had no idea about the game. I know it sounds strange but it's really true.

"well deserved" was in regards to that you tried to steal almost every single big blind with whatever hand for several rounds (which of course is he right play at that time, not denying that). I always had to fold because I had 5-9 high offsuit all the time. When I had Q high and 4bb I had to call and I caught you stealing. 10 high is a pure steal and that's why I said well deserved, that's all. At some point you "deserved" to lose one of those.  

"gives the one who shoves almost a coin flip in about 90% of the time. Maybe 85%" is wrong. If I have 2 overcards to your hand I have 65% preflop. Hands like KQ, KJ, QJ, AK, AQ, AJ, every high pair obviously and even 99, 88, 77 are also ahead very well.
You only look ok against a hand like mine with a high and a low card (lower than 6, cause if it was 7,8 or 9 my % would also go up). Everything else doesn't call or kind of "dominates" 10 6 with 65% and up. Not really a coinflip anymore cause you only win 1 out of 3 times.
Anyway, I think we all played well and the order is also fine. You have to play with what you get or at some point the blinds will kill you.

But as I have stated before NLH really is testing my patience, that's why I never play it, only in freerolls. Omaha is and always will be my game of choice because it's not as boring as NLH. Folding for orbit after orbit is so sad, especially when it's past midnight, hahaha.

The 4BB argument AHOYBRAUSE is bringing up here is the only detail that makes sense both in the tone he chooses and the semantics.

"4BB, I barely had any choice", and "Q high gives me the chance to have the high card to start with". Both correct.

The rest of his post is funny.

6/10s against Q2 os is a coin flip, that is what poker players call it regardless of whether they are mathematical geniuses or not. 53%, that's what you get in a best case scenario with Q2 os unless the opponent shoves crap, but even then, Q2, if not blocking the opponent's kicker, really sucks.

A 6/10s, unless the opponent blocks one card with a higher kicker, gives the one who shoves almost a coin flip in about 90% of the time. Maybe 85%. When AHOYBRAUSE says it was "well deserved" to win the hand with Q2, where do you get the "well" from? 53% chance? When you toss a coin and it hits tails and you chose tails, do you say it was "well" deserved? Hm, sounds odd to me.

6/10 with dual kicker domination has you dead in the water when anything hits, or creates value because of suited or backdoors flush/straight.

But as I said, Q2 is the right decision here, not because you think you well deserve the win, but because the circumstances forced you into making this call.

A9 vs. A4, AHOYBRAUSE, once you win those hands, time to play the lottery the same day! I am sure you know that

Last thing: my setups sucked like the first 80% of the time, so did my cards although I can't complain, I had aces, kings, queens, everything. But nobody else had anything.

But I am a calm player, and in the end I ran like a 2000 horsepower Ferrari, I was laughing myself. But I wonder how many would have gotten kicked out before their ran started.

AHOYBRAUSE not as I respect his patience, played very well and I said to memehunter that it was very refreshing to see some great level of poker. Much more fun and would be happy to see you again at our tables.

I would never frame an answer to your question as a general rule of thumb while going into too much detail. I think as a very basic, reasonable approach, putting opponents under pressure as the bubble comes closer, or bubble game is already going on, makes sense in a lot of situations. BUT, if you already noticed one or more players who are willing to go crazy any time, it depends. There are so many tough spots against players who don't care about ICM or their buy in. You are on the button, have got A2, you push and get reraised all in. Yes you are the chip leader, but it might not be worth the money at all and the worst thing is that you know the guy might have Q2. You can pretty quickly figure out who is loose, like VPIP, but by the time the bubble comes close, dynamics change.

I would observe how players react in general to raises, calls, their understanding of positions at the table, etc. If you notice that you are like 4 players and the third gets paid, they are equal stacks and instantly folding to any raise you make, of course you would exploit that. But if there is one guy who you noticed as "I don't give a ***", then playing more defensively can make sense as they eliminate each other and you extract value from being patient and waiting for opponents' initiative while maybe once holding a monster.

In my opinion it is not like "this is your stack, there is the bubble and now you have to push no matter what".

Do you guys think that playing aggressively is good when approaching Bubble as a chip leader? Or do you think gone are the days when players were affected by this, nowadays almost everyone is aware of the fact that you will play any two near bubble so he can easily capitalize on that, either trapping you or bluffing you out.
I have personally encounter the later action more. I do not know if it is because of my overall aggressive image or something else. Recently, I have suffered a lot because of putting pressure on low stacks, which backfired badly almost every time. How do you navigate these waters as a chip leader? I mean, it is simple if you have a short stack, you have to move all in or fold.

Actually it was a full house, not 4 of a kind. 
Well to be fair, in the 1st hand I was favorite and I had 4 big blinds, of course I call with a queen when getting shoved into by the chip leader, and I was right because I was ahead. Getting the hit on the river was well deserved, I also had 7 outs by the way, just for the river.
The other hand was a no brainer as well since I only had 8 bb and that's an easy shove from the button. Sure the runout was crazy, after the flop I already wrote gg in the chat, haha. That's situations where it's out of the player's hands. Small stack and shoved into or an ace in hand, nothing you can do about it.
But that day it was impossible to beat mv anyway. The cards and setups he got were straight up insane, that's how it works sometimes. Fun game though, even though quite boring at times since I think I was the player with the most preflop folds because I straight up had so much garbage, couldn't even hunt 1 bounty.

Or you could have used your magical powers to change the turn and river to make four of a kind. I mean, you are quite good at it.

---

True. Well said!


He was putting me on AK, AQ type of hands or draws. But when I foolishly checked the river, he capitalized on that. All credit to him for making that move against me as usually I DO NOT FOLD.
Fun fact: I managed to win that tournament.

---

Well, in my opinion I see the preflop raise for a final table as wrong. You are the chip leader but you have hardly any difference over the second and by raising preflop you are fattening the pot unnecessarily which can end up with you commited with the pot with a marginal hand. As played, I see the rest as standard until the river, when your hand is worthless. As the opponent is an aggressive player there are more bluffs in his range but I would more likely make the call in cash table, than at the final table of a tournament. I have made a few hero calls in similar situations over the years after thinking but in general with that river you have an easy check fold that you would have easily done if you had not fattened the pot preflop, as you yourself recognize later.

By the way, the opponent is not aggressive, he is a deep retard, paying 5bb raise with that stack preflop, paying with third pair on the flop and with fourth pair on the turn is to be an imbecile and he only wins the hand because he was favored by the river but if I had observed a similar hand before I probably would have paid him although you simply said "was agressive" not a fucking retard.

Nah, like I said, I would have folded as well. He played it well and looks like he knew he can push you out. Like I said, his range includes many Jacks so you can lose that pot easy which then would you leave crippled. If you have a great read on the guy you COULD make that call, especially because diamonds missed but other than that it's also good to stay alive and fight another day. But hey, I am a tight player anyway, so I would definitely have cursed at the river and folded. 

Now that I am reflecting on my play, I realize that, indeed, raising pre-flop was a big mistake. Everything until River is all standard as I have to bet my hand in order to deny equity and charge draws/overpair. Regarding the block bet, it had to be on bigger side (risky as he might have it) as small size could easily be interpreted as weak, but yeah block betting was the better option.
I have a question, though: would you guys have called in that position?
 

AHOYBRAUSE the block bet is indeed the best advice you can give here. Sure the 5x pre flop rarely makes sense, but since he got called I think your block bet makes even more sense. The check on the river gives value to many opponent hands because let's assume memehunter held 66, the push is still tough to swallow because as you said the range can easily include a jack. But a decently sized block bet is very tough to attack with 33 in that situation. It could be a value bet and 33 80-90% of the time folds in that situation. The shove is so much harder for the opponent and the shove is actually the only thing that can be done there. 33 would never call it down because it's beaten by literally any hand. 6,7,8,9,10,j, any overpair beats 33. That's why 33 then has to consider whether it is possible to push out the bet that could either be an info/block bet or a value bet. The opponent clearly played the board and nothing else.

Even against an aggressive player, seeing a shove in this situation is a kind of easy fold, there are so many Jacks in his range, hands like AJ, KJ, QJ or even J10 that's calling a raise preflop.
Sure, most of those hands (unless they are suited in diamonds) should fold to your continuation bet on the flop but with some people you never know, they can be sticky.
Great flop for you but raising 5x pre with 10 7 was the first minor mistake, at least in my opinion. Mostly because you are out of position. U got lucky and hit the flop like best case scenario though.
The one thing I would have done is making a block bet on the river. Doesn't have to be much, like 5-7bb. Checking basically opens up his chance to take a stab on it and bluff you out of the pot.

I have an even more interesting hand.
Let me know if it is a good fold or a bad fold: https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxQEODCl3A7b3rpF3d2ohFrhPFPoi3h1-S?si=JCb3-RI8TlXL_34K
The player in question was aggressive and we were all already into the money and there was no major prize jump. You can clearly see that it was a very tough and annoying spot for me.

What do you guys think of this bluff by me on Final table; https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxEfBZDIqFgG21eR1i_8GNi91YZjRBXZum?si=BHFzFTplDwLTImll

A couple of things to consider

1) Six players were left and there was a massive prize jump for 5th.
2) Players were playing ABC poker mostly. His sizings were resembling his hand strength.
3) I was playing kind of tight.

 

 
That happens (winning with the worst hand) all the time. There will always be one player on each table who will just play any two cards. These are the type of players (fishes) who beat me every time and send me on tilt mode. I mean, imagine waiting for hours, playing tight, just to get your AK cracked by garbage  .

 
Well said!
I just want to add that sometimes from an exploitative (Yeah I know I love this term ) perspective playing it (when you have to play any two cards) would make sense. And yes, you are not folding it on BB for sure.

That's true and this was the time when there was all that high stakes poker on TV, I guess you remember. With Gus Hansen those guys who had lots of fun playing the 7 2 game.

But I am still wondering how much of it was staged because it was a TV show and the last thing you want is low to no action and a boring time for those who watch it. There would in theory still be value considerations and at the very least it depends whether you are a damn multimillionaire and give more about the laugh than the money or not.

I don't think with not so much money would often go for the 7 2 just for the lolz.

However if it is a 7 2 suited, it can make sense to limp in during the tournament depending on your chip stack, but really not as a rule of thumb. Sometimes you feel like it, get a little value for the suited and if hand comes like K 7 2, 99% of the time a king that hit would not put you on 7 2. But again, mathematically it makes no sense. It's just an element of randomness that sometimes can have an impact because if you win that hand and the whole table sees the 7 2, then it did have value as you can rarely be put on a range.

When the 7 2 game is on it brings a whole different strategy/approach to the game. Some people raise/reraise hard with it just to (best case scenario) win the hand preflop, have a good laugh and then collect the penalty chips from each player. I have seen so many 7 2 bluffs because of this game and surely it makes the game more exciting. For me as a player I would not want this game to run on my table, I am not a fan of paying people because they won with the worst starting hand possible. But that's just me.

Thank you very much. Watching from reels makes me interested on the story behind since the hand itself is hopeless even for me as not a pro player but Pro Player like Daniel Negraneu which I think the one I keep seeing keep pushing this hand and manage to win out of bluffing.

It needs a great poker face just to successfully winning this hand especially if you are facing pro poker too.

I think I watch someone that play this card until the end as in until revealing the cards and actually win with pair of 7. 

Hand in question is called 7 2 off (means seven duce with different suits). It is considered the worst hand in NLHE  Poker as there are very lass chances of making a straight or a flush and you have one lowest card. With 2 3 straights are more possible as you already have two out five cards required to make a straight.
There is no history at all. Sometimes table decide that who ever will win the hand with 7 2, he will be getting extra chips from each players sitting on the table. It incentivizes players to bluff more which eventually leads to bigger pots, higher adrenaline and higher viewership.
It gives you bragging rights that I can win with lowest possible holdings against you fishes!

I’m always curious about this and I hope it’s allowed to ask here. I’m always watching highlights of poker table mostly poker star and I always wondering the story behind the 7 & 4 cards(I forgot the actual card combo) since this is always considered as the very bad hand which some pro players keeps playing for bluffing just for fun.

I’m not certain about the exact card combo but whenever I saw this being played as bluff, announcer keeps chuckling which I’m if there’s a history on this hand?

I guess you are right!
Even from GTO perspective, my fold is wrong let alone from exploitative perspective.
You rightly said about in hand situation. Things are much clearer from outsiders perspective. I just could not put him on any range which I can beat so I folded.
 

You said he presumable was tilt. That is where I think your decision was wrong. But don't get me personally wrong. It is easy to analyze, but when you are in the situation, things are different. But let me try to be objective, I think I would have called. It is statistics, sometimes you lose the call, but most of the time you win it. Easy calculation, but mixed with emotions.

But it is not wrong to fold if your intuition convinces you. I know that feeling, in online poker it's difficult because you don't get the signals from your opponent's face. In live poker I liked it very much that I could read faces. In online poker it is about reading momentum. But you can still lose. Eventually, no matter how good you are at calculating and assessing, it is a gamble. So your fold might have been the right decision in that moment, but I think you thought against yourself too aggressively in this case.

As I said in the other thread, I love discussing game theory. Go ahead

What are your opinions about my fold?
I had AQ suited UTG at 6max table. I open 2.5 BB (my standard raise 180 BB deep). Everyone fold but player at big blind re raise to 6 BB (48% VPIP, 150 BB deep). Opponent is loosing a lot and probably tilting. I 4bet to 18 BB. Opponent called after taking some time. Flop comes 4d, Qh, 10d. I bet 25% of pot and opponent jammed instantly. I thought about it and could not put him on any bluff. His range look like a three of a kind (set) or slow played KK, AA. Ultimately I decided to fold. Opponent showed me one card, 10s .

Sorry, I apologize if I sounded rude. I had no intentions of looking down at wise and sound advice by a well seasoned poker player and a reputed and established member of this forum. You are right sometimes I do talk in absolute terms (I had the same feedback some time ago in a real life discussion) and I will keep your valuable suggestion in my mind from now on.
You are playing poker way before than me (I just have 4–5 years of experience) and you have seen poker landscape evolving within your direct experience. It is good to point out  (to whoever reading this, expecting some heat )  that we both are on the same page as far as principles are concerned. We both agree that table selection will definitely give you some edge (degree of edge is the point of contention).
Thanks for your passion and dedication for creating a valuable discourse here.
   

You are speaking in so absolute terms sometimes. I didn't misse those points, I was saying that it became less relevant. I have been actively playing poker since the early 2000s and back then table observation was a huge deal. It was really exactly like you said. Observe the table, find the weak players and then you had an edge if you were disciplined and intellectually high level.

There is still an influx of new players, but the number of good players or - due to all the available software and material - educated players logically has risen, too. Back then the ratio was "low number of good players : high number of new/additions players". This "low : high" has evened out for several reasons. Besides you there are now five other good players preying on the bad player you have just identified. You will rarely find a table with 8 bad players where you can join as the 1 good player.

The isolation game, which you correctly described, becomes infinitely harder with every single additional good player at the table because they won't let you do your thing.

As for the tilt gaming part as a proven phenomenon. Proven, of course it is proven. Tilt in poker is no different from being tilt in any other life situation except for the fact that in poker the consequence is that someone puts money in the middle. In a relationship you might scream at your partner, in a bar you might get involved in a brawl, in a football game you might tackle someone's leg into two pieces and receive a red card or punch the referee in the face (little exaggeration ). But the last exaggeration is important: do you always want to play against a tilted person? It depends on your mood and whether you are willing to risk parts of your bankroll on a certain day because variance becomes higher against a tilted player as the number of hands is lower and if you have a real edge, then more hands are more likely to have you materialize the edge than less hands. A tilted player tends to force a low numerical of hands, for instance in a heads-up game. Then it is all about the shuffling. A10 to you and AJ to him, he goes all in, you call. Dead.

There is one caveat though: if you play very tight bankroll management and you use stacks that allow you to take on these all in situations for a very long time, then in the long run it would still turn you into a winning player. But from my experience, a bad luck streak against tilted players can turn calm and disciplined players into tilted players themselves. There are a lot of variables again that would have to fall in place in order for your strategy to work long term.

In a worst case you as the disciplined player end up with a leg getting tackled into two pieces by the tilted player

But you are missing two crucial points here;

1. lots of new players do come and most of them are still learning about pot odds, good starting hands, position etc. If you actively do table selection, you will get to play with a constant influx of new weak players, massively boosting your profitability. Although I understand it might hamper your skills a bit but having some extra table open in such scenario good thing.

2. Tilt; It is a proven phenomenon is poker. Almost every player goes on tilt, so by table selection you can easily find an overall average player but tilting at that moment. The more they lose, the more they tilt and try to play every pot with a raise. 

Table selection can have an impact on your results, but it isn't as beneficial to observe tables as it used to be 15 years ago. On the one hand you need to be sure that you are playing on a platform without bots and on the other hand those high percentage VPIP players prefer to play lower stakes cash games and they can use software to make their decisions. There is still some advantage you can exploit, but it is not as much as it was many years ago. Back then you could identify the fish at a table and then go for it because too many players were too lazy to learn the probabilities and implications of positioning and many players were too lazy to put in the time to analyze other players. This has changed because they can now switch on a software and get all the numbers (like VPIP) automatically.

But if you are planning on playing one table and you've got the time, there is nothing to say against taking a moment and having a look at how players play at a certain table.

Here is another very profitable strategy of mine, called table selection.
Almost every poker room allow you to observe tables in real time. I recommend you to look for a table with very high average VPIP. It should be more than 40% for 9max and above 50% for 6 max, for NLHE tables.
Then you look for which player/s is/are responsible for such high VPIPs and mark them. Usually they are recreational players or are on tilt . It will be super profitable for you to just play tight and isolate them in the pot.
So next time, do not just sit on any table full of regulars instead devote some extra time in table selection, and you will see the results .
What do you guys think of it?

Well, I am not sure if I agree with your justification regarding using straddle as a mean to block bet, but your argument surely has merit regarding positional play. As far as I know (I know very less) tight players usually play very few hands (by definition) so positional play might not suit their playing style. It might will cost them a lot in terms of chip EV as they will be putting more money than every one else in dark, this was the core of my argument regarding usefulness of straddling.
It is ok to do it in short term (for fun) but for a regular player it does not make sense. Or there is something which I am not able to comprehend.

Well straddling has one big advantage, you are the last to act preflop.  Even for tight players it might make sense to straddle since it might block other players from bumping up the pot preflop. Sure that only works if the table is more tight in general and action seeking players will still raise. But it's kind of a funny approach to use a straddle to block.

On GG poker I hate that some clown players straddle allin preflop every hand, that's so annoying. And often enough when they get called by a much better hand they somehow find the miracle suckout.
I think I never ever straddled if I remember correctly. Most sites I played at in the past didn't even offer that so I guess that's why I never got the idea to do it.

What do you guys think of straddling in poker? Do you think of any scenario where straddling can make sense to a regular player? I have seen many players doing straddling specially in 9max games and honestly I do not think they are fishes. Maybe they are doing this to somehow deceive others, as their VPIP stat will be showing 100%  . 
What are your opinions ?

Yes OMAHA is considered 'the game of nuts' for a reason. Almost every time your opponent will have a significant amount of equity no matter what. You are right, few know about OMAHA strategy unlike NLHE where almost every one is playing the same ranges pre flop. IMO you should play extremely tight preflop in OMAHA.
I can see that you are good at exploitative play by labeling opponents  .
Nice strategy. Thanks for sharing it with us.
 

Oh not really mate. Sincerely I just play for fun but I know the metrics its just that I am not aware of the strategy or didnt rely on that but only playing with the limited knowledge I have for poker.

Even though I didnt recognize those technique I am able to win some places on some competition I joined on discord for rewards. So I could say it depends on how you strategize the play. Anyway this thread of yours is helpful to newbie or beginner like me in poker.

I am more of a passive player while playing Omaha because I want to keep the size of the pot under control. Sometimes when you flop big ( flush or straight) I fast play also because you want sets and 2 pair hands paying for their full house draw. Too often when I didn’t fast play I got punished when the opponent got their with their limited outs.
But yeah, normally I am not a big raiser and let people run into it. I have been called a bit so often, which is fine by me actually because these people have no clue about Omaha anyway, raising every single hand preflop like it’s a lottery or something. Easy to let them do their thing and give them some rope, if you know what I mean. Once you have a ton of (edit  ) notes on a certain player it’s easy to adjust your game towards their gameplay.

You are right with most things, but there is one part that is important and could be misunderstood: you mentioned mindfulness

Since you called this a "strategy", it sounds as if this is a move you frequently use throughout the tournament. That is where I clearly say it is a losing move, you can do the statistics and don't get fooled by the excitement you feel when it works out a couple of times. It usually still doesn't win you the SitnGO or MTT.

I would rather call it a tactic or a single move that you can either make use of in the very first hands of a tournament or when you have identified a player/ some players at a table that are likely to fall for it and where you know that your AJ might already be good enough to suck someone in with KJ or A9.

But since you now also mentioned that many players are at best involved in a hand, then the move is severely limited in its effect. You have to take into account positioning (UTG1, UTG2 etc.), chip stacks, and how many good players there are. If it's 9-way and there are 3-4 really good guys playing, I would try to trap you and not the noob. I'd literally wait for the moment if I am lucky enough to get a monster hand and provoke you to try to push me out of the hand.

I stick to what I have said earlier. In a tournament that's mostly played by weak players and low stakes, this is indeed something I do too at times. Overbets, snap all ins, etc.

But by the way when I mention high stakes, it doesn't necessarily mean that there are no idiotic players. There still are because "high" is relative and some maybe don't care about a buy in that I would consider "high".

And one more question: what range of hands are you talking about when you consider that move? If the flop is 10/5/2, you played 10/9, overbet the river and your opponent goes snap all in. Is it a call? In a low stakes tournament it is because I don't give a damn about the buy in most of the time, but if there is something on the line, I would rather be careful because of my weak kicker.

If you are talking about monsters only where you literally have the nuts on the river so to say, then an overbet could destroy future value because you don't give your opponent the chance to improve their hand and put more value into the middle.

So overbetting sometimes wins you additional value in a single hand, but sometimes destroys potential future value because overbets push out your opponent. Looking at it from a value perspective both flop-related and with respect to the turn and river, this tactic may not be favorable if you apply long-term EV considerations.

In keeping my post short I somehow compromised preciseness. You are right and I should have mentioned that most of the time you have to do this move after river preferably having many players in it (so that everyone can make notes ). This can be 1x, 2x, or maybe 75% of the pot not necessarily 5x ( I thought it would be obvious) as long as you get to give an impression of an overly bluffy player.

Well, I think I will disagree here. I think most players will hero-call me and will surely try to trap me.
What makes a player rational, yes it the knowledge of ranges and opponent's patterns (notes) that is exactly why a rational player (who is more attentive) will call me more. As I said especially in the early stages of tournaments when tables are changing quickly and all you have is one or two hands notes on me (played with deception)  to make the decision.
I understand that any genius will beat me most of the time but a wide range of players will not.
Regarding concerned stakes, I am a low/mid-stake player (10-25 NL) so I do not have much idea about high stakes.
   
I mean there are some scenarios where you will go broke no matter what. It is not that just because I am doing a strategy I have to play every hand like that . I thought mindfulness was obvious.

---

I know you are a strong player as I have played many times against you. I am thankful that you are providing your POV and experience in this thread. I think we both have similar playing styles (though you might not admit that) and I respect your opinions.

---

---

Nice strategy specially playing offline with new players. I do not think doing this online is feasible but you can always ask what this 'staddle' means? ;

True, almost everyone can play nuts it is the art of bluffing that makes you a good player. 

You are doing it the right way. It shows that you are a attentive player which is very difficult to play with as you will be quick to realize the changes in opponents pattern and adjust you game accordingly. This is the essence of exploitative poker.

  (For online play).

I think we all are low-stakes players here (correct me if wrong). I occasionally play 50NL and 100NL but very rarely.

---

---

I understand, was just pointing out an obvious psychological hurdle many have which is to keep emotions away as much as possible. Thanks for clarifying it anyway.

Well, you are right, the main idea is to keep your Dopamine/Adrenaline spikes down so that your base level does not rise too frequently with a particular action/incident at the table.
This will allow you to take more rational decisions otherwise your mind will force you to chase the previous dopamine spike which will lead you to play more silly hands and entering in less profitable pots. Do not underestimate the power of your mind if left untrained (or trained ).
 
I do not think this is a sustainable strategy for most of us, I got the point though

---

---

Being calm means different things to different people. It's not like i am going for baits (or least i don't think i am).

I think that acknowledging feelings can be an edge for me, as long as recognize and deal with them correctly, and not just act on them. Feelings are natural part of my processing and helps me emphasize how others could think. Numbing them would make me potentially lose my interest and focus.

But that's just me, i recon this way is not for everyone. Boredom is/was definitely my biggest flaw, and something my meds help with now.

One of the ways for me to be played and get not bored is when i am tired. I think it must be because i am relaxed, or just too tired to be bored or anxious . I might also experience time differently.

Two of my best performances  in tournaments were when i was barely awake, and went to sleep right after.

I am less than a frequent player but know enough to realise poker is as much about
psychology as it is about the cards. So when I start off playing I play my first 5
or so hands as if I am "only learning" to give everyone else that impression.

My game play is mostly based on bluffing but isnt that the case most of the time
for most players?

My bluff is very similar to memehunter's play but instead after winning a few
small pots I completely change tactic and fold everything after winning. I then
start bluffing again when I have a run of nothing hands. This all changes whenever
I draw quality hands, and I mix what hands I show, some bluffs I show, some I dont
but I always show my top hands.

As regards psychology, its important to obviously have a poker face or maybe 3 poker
faces for different plays and to mix them up , its also important  to try and get a read
on the opponents.

I also want to add that I only play low stakes because I dont play enough to feel
comfortable with my strategies to go high stakes.

This may work in early stages of the tournament mostly where it is about low stakes. If you play in higher stakes tournaments against good players, this is a losing strategy of the time. The problem is if you raise say 5x the tiny pot and show your cards and then in another hand you raise 5x the tiny pot and got a good hand, you would still have to build the pot afterwards. If you snap fire all in on the flop, the opponent should only be calling if they hit the flop.

I know that there are dudes who call with King high then, but this is quite rare and really in low stakes poker. A rational player wouldn't do that. And don't forget that the range of your opponent is hard to assess, too. If you demonstrate that your range is unpredictable, then it is as likely that someone else will call you with an unknown range.

Let's say you play AK suddenly and you semi-miss the pot, but still got some value. You could always get stuck as over bluffing or semi over bluffing pots can get you stuck where your value position is subpar, but since you over bluffed it you may be inclined to play the hand till the end.

Set ups play a huge role as well. You could get stuck with a strong hand against an even stronger hand, like AQ vs. AK. That is why at least in higher stakes tournaments, you would sometimes prefer pot control over the lucky shot.

Of course in lower stakes tournaments where you don't really care about losing the buy in, you can take the risk and play it like this and get every strong hand all in despite the risk to be up against a stronger kicker or top pair.

Or may be you are pretending to be a fish (recreational player) . I think you are triple bluffing as @o48o just told us. Quite deep strategy mate

21 is a 2008 American heist drama film directed by Robert Luketic. The film is inspired by the story of the MIT Blackjack Team as told in Bringing Down the House, the best-selling 2003 book by Ben Mezrich.
This has nothing to do with poker .
I mean you do understand poker and blackjack are two different games, right? Or maybe you are triple bluffing again.

Honestly Im not a professional poker player but indeed I enjoy playing poker so merely a hobby and enjoyable fun activity for me. I didnt know that there were deeper strat on poker. I am looking forward to reading more on discussion here might as well learn something.

But theres a movie I watched and they employ a technique counting cards. The scene is on Vegas, does it really happened in real life? I mean that kind of strategy? Forgot the movie name was but it has something 21 on the title.

The risk/Reward ratio is good enough for me, especially in the early stages of the tournament. Where tables change quickly and nobody has time to put on some reads. Although you have to be careful in cash games, it is still a lot better than playing super tight.

You must be kidding me almost 99% of players are playing the same ranges (20-25% VPIP) when it comes to tournaments especially early on. People are overfolding a lot which can also add up quickly .

You are right but only a few serious players will pay attention to that. The majority will simply look at their notes on you which should be like this 'Bluffy fish overbetting any two' especially when everyone is mulitabling.

The word 'exploitative' is better in the poker field. And I agree when everybody is playing GTOish you should play exploitative. Although having sound knowledge of GTO will make you more lethal.

I know that he knows that I know that he knows...

Having any kick is not good for a poker player. It will act as a barrier to long-term development. No kicks no trigger points stay calm an compose every time.

No way! You have made a great post which requires energy and focus. I am very thankful to you that you shared your strategy with us to stay connected and I am sorry if I sounded too critical(rude).

---

I understand the psychology behind showing your cards after they fold, and in some cases, that's definitely profitable (If people flag you like you want them to).

This also relies on others folding, because even if you are losing only small pots, those add up quickly. And depending how lucky you end up being, it can backfire and make your tactic transparent by you not calling if they rise the pot. There's a reason why everyone is trying to play aggressive at the start.

But as the game is not about winning every hand anyway, being inconstant how you play right after using this tactic would definitely be beneficial and confusing.

Personally i think that showing your cards afterwards is just too transparent bait, and since it's during the start, i wouldn't even think that it's some kind of triple bluff, because there are ton of fishes in the game.

Best "tricks" that i am using are psychological. Reading patterns in people is hard in online games, and almost impossible with frequently ganging tables, but it can be an edge. I mainly focus on my own mindset, where i combat my frustration and try to focus. Realizing the fact that i am not trying to win every hand, or good pocket pairs. What i am trying to figure out is how others are playing those hands and what i am up against.

Biggest kicks i get from getting rid of players who are trying to control the table, while making them think i am just ragebetting against their semi-good hand. That requires some luck and good timing.

Sorry if this too vague, but imho reading people in poker isn't equivalent to chess, where you can calculate moves, while on poker, you need the context (or feel) of the players.

Really "Falcon Punch" . Sorry to break it down to you but this strategy is terrible.
You are waiting for a good pair be it JJ+, so you are playing only 2% of the hands. . First of all, you will be blinded out in most of the scenarios as you will simply not get enough hands mathematically. Second, it is way easier for your opponent to put you on a very narrow range which will lead to a ludicrous amount of blind stealing from you. And they will simply fold against your open.
I suggest you open more hands, the ideal range for a recreational player like you would be 20-22%.

In the past I used to play poker online with friends, but not the way you are thinking, my friends used to come to my house, we mix our bankrolls and join to a table on a single account, the we used to do a move that we call "Falcon Punch". The strategy was simple, we wait to get a good pair like AA, KK, o QQ, and then go all in. Simple as that but efective, we walked away with profit most of the times we try It.

Let me give you one of my strategies related to, 'table image'. This is probably the most valuable one. I will try to keep it short and precise;
You overbluff in very small pots (2x-5x the pot) and if they fold, you win if they call, you lose a small pot but either way, make sure to let them see your cards. . Do it very carefully in very small pots a couple of times and you will establish an image of an overly bluffy player. Now just wait for the nuts and repeat the same action, you will be surprised to see that they will call you with anything.
This is especially useful in earlier stages of tournaments when blinds are quite low and pots are also small.

This thread is specifically for discussing poker strategies and hand analysis. Any low-quality and generic post will be deleted (zero tolerance).

What types of poker games can be discussed here?
NLHE and OMAHA (4 and 5 card variants) only. You can discuss both cash games as well as tournaments.

Can I post information about joining any free/paid tournament or cash games on any platform?
No. Any such information will be deleted if your sole purpose is to just post that information. However, if that information is part of your strategy/hand analysis, bankroll building, and table selection you can mention it but be very careful.

Anything else?
Not really, if you are a serious player and want to improve you will surely get along well here.

---

---